The Blog

In previous blog post, we discussed how prominent evolutionists are suggesting panspermia theory. In light of “just so” explanations such as spontaneous generation and panspermia, who do you think is practicing the bad science: the people called “religious” (the theists/creationists) or the “enlightened” ones (the atheists/Darwinists) who are really just as religious as the “religious”.

Physicist and information scientists Hubert Yockey realizes it is the Darwinists. He writes, “The belief that life on earth arose spontaneously from nonliving matter, is simply a matter of faith in strict reductionism and is based entirely on ideology.” Yockey is right. Darwinists falsely believe they can reduce life to its nonliving chemical components. This is the ideology of reductionism.

For Darwinists like Dawkins or Crick who believe that only the material exists, life can be nothing more than chemicals. But is life is clearly more than nonliving chemicals. Life contains a message – DNA – that is expressed in chemicals, but those chemicals cannot cause the message any more than the chemicals in ink and paper can construct sentences on paper. The message points to something beyond chemicals. The message in life points to an intelligence beyond its chemical elements.

So by the blind naturalistic, reductionist ideology – which is against all science and observation – Darwinists dogmatically assert that life generated spontaneously from its nonliving chemical components. Ironically, this is exactly what Darwinists have long accused creationists of doing – allowing their ideology to overrule observation and reason. In truth, it is actually Darwinists who are allowing their faith to overrule observation and reason.

Christians are simply making a rational inference based on the evidence. They are following the evidence exactly where it leads – back to an intelligent cause.

Now the real truth comes out. The real truth is that the Darwinists have defined science in such a way that the only possible answer is Darwinism. The spontaneous generation of first life is believed because of false philosophical assumptions disguised as science, not because they are legitimate scientific observations that support spontaneous generation.

False science is bad science, and it is the Darwinists who are practicing it. Their belief in spontaneous generation results from their blind faith in naturalism.

Can time be a plausible explanation for how life spontaneously generated according to Darwinists?